It always seems that end up having this conversation with the most wide assortment of peoplethat still have a place in their heart for this quaint fairytale of a right . For those that believe that this right existed or even exist today a question.
How would Louisiana have a legal right to secede. In even if one believed in the Calhounish view of the "Compact" how would any State outside the original 13 and Texas be able to leave. These were Federal Terror ties
How could Louisiana and Arkansas say they could leave the Union since the United States bought it and in fact governed it and the privilege of entering the Union as a State was done by a Act of Congress.
The Federal Govt gave birth to us so it appears that entire Louisiana Purchase does this not have this right nor Florida
Further outside most of the original Colonies much of the land in places like Mississippi., Bama etc were ceded to the Federal Govt in exchange for payment of war debt. See here for those areas of the United States that the separate states ceded to the federal government in the late 18th and early 19th century.
So even if ones believes in the Compact theory with the exception of the 13 and Texas why do people in Louisiana and Florida and elsewhere in areas I describe think they can piggy back on States like South Carolina
I never get a very satisfactory answer to this when I bring it up.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Regarding the Myth of the Right of State Secession
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm a believer in secession and my paper on the subject is open to refutation. I'm more then willing to discuss it.
Now to you your argument above, it is not a new argument and has been dealt with many times. The reason you are wrong is all states admitted to the Union have the very same rights of the original states that formed the Union. If this were not so, all states ofter the first 13 would be less than equal.
This was understood by folks in Louisiana.
BTW: Don't forget that Virginia and other states when they ratified the Constitution, the did so with the proviso that the retaine th right to leave the Union if the Fed abused it's authority. Hummmm? I can't imagine the Feds doing that. LOL
Deo Vindice,
Kenith
Ps. See my article at:
http://cajunhuguenot1.blogspot.com/2006/06/secession-i-have-posted-mostly.html
and
http://cajunhuguenot1.blogspot.com/2008/01/secession-discussion-few-days-ago-i.html
and
http://cajunhuguenot1.blogspot.com/2008/08/thomas-jefferson-and-secession-thomas.html
and
I shall read those papers and try todo a response later today
I guess my question is this. Why would Louisiana if it wanted to renounce its statehood in the US Framework not just revert back to previous status. That is a Federal Territory legally. Under the compact theory one could say well OK SOuth Catrolina if you think you can withdraw and return to what you think your previous status was fine. But so will All these other States. Everyone has still equal rights
For instance does this make sence. Lets say the voters in Alaska one year after they voted to become a State ina sly move vote to Secede. Alaska after asking for the honor and getting all those rights that come with being a State says HA HA fooled you we know you bought us but now we are taking all the oil, diamonds, gold , and Fish and leaving yall out in the cold
How does this make sense.
Cajun as to the State Const you mentioned. And let me say I think we are talking more about a natural law right to rebel than secession in some of these
On this thread page see
Federalist 44
and
Madisions reply to Hamilition as to the Ratrification by New York
http://civilwartalk.com/forums/civil-war-history-secession-politics/28139-10th-amendment-get-out-union-free-card-8.html
Post a Comment